I said that? I believe it was you who suggested that I must have been "in the chess club" because I opposed football on college campuses. Besides the glaring non sequitur, you're also guilty of putting words in my mouth.
My stance is that football -- athletics in general -- are not proper sponsored activities in an academic setting. I don't care how many manly men are football players; that has nothing to do with the argument. Those men would have been manly -- and presumably have demonstrated the same qualities of leadership and courage -- regardless of the setting in which they indulged their passion for sports. How does that argue in favor of football on campus?
Check mate.
More like Fool's Mate. And you're playing Black.
Go back and read what you wrote. You referred to football student athletes as gorillas. You focused entirely on their athletic ability and eliminated any sort of academic potential or leadership ability they may have. You were the one, sir, who focused entirely on the assumption that pure academics/book smart intellect is what made this Country great. Again, check mate. Have a good day.